The SP101 in .327 is very much alive and available from many places around the web and your LGS. I shoot both the .327 Fed Mag and .32 H&R Mag from my SP101 and like them both. There have been some people pronouncing its demise but Ruger is sticking with the caliber. Now that the .327 Fed Mag is being offered in a somewhat wider array of choices for ammo interest should hopefully pick up in the caliber.

I'm keeping mine and looking at the Blackhawk for my next purchase in .327.

Just got the replacement for the scrapped SP101 327 this week. It is from new production with a much improved hammer- doesn't peel the skin off your thumb. Haven't shot it yet but will post after I do. Hope they fixed the problems since this is a beautiful firearm.

Just put me another brandnew 327 sp101 in lay-away today. I had issues with 2 of these guns in the past when I would shoot 32 H&R in revolver the hammer wouldn't go into full cock. Worked fine with 327 ammo. This one rotates cylinder and goes into full cock like it should no issues at all. I had some non-primed 32 H&R caseings to check this out before I
commited to the lay-away. I am happy love the gun and caliber.

I've been wanting a SP101 in .327 Fed for my wife, who can't tolerate recoil for medical reasons. This thread has me wondering...

Hopefully Ruger has fixed or will fix any problems related to manufacturing.

The one I want for her is a 4" but I can't find any. Hoping that by the time I do the problems will be fixed.

_________________Coyote HunterNRA Endowment Life, GOA, RMEF, DAD - and I vote!*******************************************No, I'm not a Ruger bigot - just an unabashed fan of their revolvers, M77's and #1's.

Doh. Went back to the Ruger site and found out it was the .357 that is now offered in 4" - there is no .327 in that length.

Not sure why I thought a .327 was offered, but color me disappointed.

_________________Coyote HunterNRA Endowment Life, GOA, RMEF, DAD - and I vote!*******************************************No, I'm not a Ruger bigot - just an unabashed fan of their revolvers, M77's and #1's.

I bought an early SP-101 in .327 Fed Mag, interested in the potential of the round. That was before I started to reload.

I too had the extraction problem - which I figured out was related to three oversized chambers. Problem #1. I marked them and returned it to Ruger, who fixed it for me (kudos to customer service, which must have been under a lot of pressure relating to this issue at the time). I continued to shoot it, but became discouraged by problem #2 - expensive ammo -- and problem #3, the trigger guard smacking my middle finger pretty hard. I sold the gun, must have been two years ago.

Yesterday I ordered a new one from Bud's Guns, for $472 post paid. I reckon the sticky cylinders is no longer a problem. I ordered Hogue grips for it, too, which hopefully will make life easier on my hand. (I am also going to try shooting it with Mechanix gloves, which everyone raves about).

Ammo is still expensive (someone should make cheap .32 H&R ammo. The best deal I see out there is the Georgia Arms stuff). I think the SP-101 and other revolvers chambered in .327 Fed Mag would fly off the shelves if someone marketed an inexpensive "target" round for the gun under $20 for a box of 50.

I also ordered 50 American Eagle .327 rounds to get started, plus RCBS dies and 100 Federal cases in .327 from Midway, and some Rainier and Berry's bullets (keeping in mind you probably cannot push their copper-plated - not jacketed - lead bullets to the full speed potential of the .327 Fed Mag). My goal is to hand load some gentle but accurate and reasonably potent rounds. I am going to start out with .32 H&R type loads in the .327 cases, with lighter bullets, and see if that yields a pleasant shooting experience, and then slowly move up closer to the lightest .327 load. I will probably focus on Win 231 and Unique powders. Using .327 cases for my loads, and not using .32 H&R cases, should eliminate the carbon ring problem associated with shooting .32 H&R rounds followed by .327 Fed Mag rounds.

On top of all of this, I have my eye on a GP100 revolver in .327 Fed Mag. That should be a very mild shooting gun, at 40 oz. versus the 24 oz. SP-101, even using some of the hottest .327 Fed Mag loads...

Bottom line = I am betting the .327 Fed Mag round is here to stay, and I'm all in.

There may have been some problems in the early SP101s, but I have one that is great! Accurate, good smooth triger and the only time it ever has an extraction problem is when I have fired several cylinders of 32HR mags and fouls the cylinder further back in the chamber. My Smith 632 does the same thing.

My question still stands though ... How is it POSSIBLE for that to happen ?

Hi,

Short answer, Rev: POOR QC.

Take this for what it's worth (hearsay?) but a buddy of mine's fairly familiar w/ the machining processes that would be used to produce products such as revolver cylinders. He says multiple holes like that are generally gang bored, as boring each one individually would be costly in time, and it would be much harder to control the actual location of each hole over a long run of parts.

So there's a cutting head w/ five or six bits that comes down and does all the holes at once. He says in a perfect world, all the bits would be size matched in sets from get go, and replaced simultaneously. However, we don't live in a perfect world, so the bits may never be matched to start with (someone just grabs a handful from the box.) Then, one might wear faster than the others, get broken, or bent, and some penny pincher upstairs may have ordered JUST the offending bit be replaced. As the bits wear, they become smaller, so the chambers become tighter, but if a single bit's been replaced, we could see one larger (not necessarily oversize, though) hole.

Sometimes a bit can get bent. This could result from hitting a hard spot in the metal, overheating, or other factors (wear in the chuck, for example?) This bit, though possible still perfectly sized, will wobble, producing untold varieties of "shapes" of holes.

Now, all these things are known, and somewhat predictable. So God invented inspectors! But we've got to use them... and that's where things start to fall apart. Ruger's well known for being "tolerant of tolerances" as it were: "close" seems to have migrated from horsehoes and hand grenades onto their factory floor at times!

So, regardless of the actual mechanical cause, problems such as Charlie reports SHOULD have been caught and his cylinder scrapped before it ever was assembled into a gun. However, for whatever reasons, it wasn't caught at all, or someone said "It's good enough. Ship it out and we'll deal w/ it if it comes back." The old "There's never time to do it right, but always time to do it over" mentality raises its ugly head!

We hear constantly how good Ruger's customer service is. I wonder how many folks it occurs to that they should never have occasion to find out how a company's service is, let alone at the rate Ruger customers do! I have a hard time figuring how the bean counters have worked this one out except that perhaps a majority of customers just "don't care" or "don't know" they have problems?

In the '80s, "poor QC" might have been an acceptable answer. But QC did not create the problem.

Hi,

Agreed, QC did not CREATE the problem.

However, as a consumer, that guy they need to survive, I want to buy a product--any product, not just a Ruger--that works, reliably, as designed, out of the box. Proper QC ensures I GET that product. I don't want to have to "finish" it (Rugers were referred to as "kit guns" in our shop: "You buy one, bring it to us, and we'll finish it for you!" They worked quite well when they went home, too, but our guys didn't work for free, and it wasn't Ruger who paid the bill! Is that good for the consumer?) Nor do I want to have to send it back to the mfr to see how good their customer service is. And, in the case of a gun, where we can't just "exchange" a bad one for a good one like it was a shirt the wrong size, this stuff becomes MORE aggravating!

The result of that kind of production and marketing? None of the MBA whiz kids ever sent me a questionnaire to ask why, after having bought several Rugers, my last several purchases were from OTHER mfrs when Ruger makes a competing model I could have bought. But if they had, I'd have to answer "You're too sloppy about the products you ship out for my taste, and I think the guys I DID buy from did their jobs a little better." Put differently, my experience w/ the Rugers I've bought created some good advertising for their competitors!

For comparative purposes: IF, right out of the box, all were like my Mk II, I'd never buy another brand! If they were all like my Bisley or 10/22 (and I hadn't learned of Ruger's foibles in the shop first), I'd probably never buy another Ruger. So I've developed a "Don't buy what you can't see and handle first" mentality and that got me a pretty good GP and RH! So Ruger's still on the radar screen, sometimes. But a lot of guns aren't on the shelf, so I won't order one, because in in my neighborhood, a lot of dealers aren't willing to order one unless I commit to buy the one that comes in, even if it's a dud. Huh, uh.

So consumer perception is THE key. And it doesn't depend on HOW the product was made, what buzz term of the month drives its production, or even its production methods. I don't need to know a single thing about casting vs forging processes, materials qualities and characteristics, hand machining vs CNC production processes, or whether the original operator or a separate inspector ensured the product is as it should be before it goes in the box. I don't need to know how the accounting department handles its inventory reporting or its allowance for defects and returns, or even care who the cutest teller at their bank is.

What I DO need to know is when I open the box, the product will be what it's advertised to be and work as it's expected to work. If it doesn't, QC FAILED to CATCH the problem. And that's at whatever level it's exercised. Depending on how badly it failed, I may be simply disappointed, a little disgruntled, or PO'd enough to switch brands w/ my next purchase! That's the part the whiz kids miss... oh, yeah, they also miss the conversations at the range: "How do you like your Ruger?" "Well, it's like this..."

Dr. W. Edwards Deming must be spinning donuts in his grave at the way some of this stuff's playing out these days!

I've had Ruger give me a different gun in exchange for one I was dissatisfied with. They tend to be pretty loose about it. In my case, I got a .357/9mm BH in exchange for an LCR22 which I didn't like. If it comes down to a refund, I'm sure they will do right by you and refund your actual price.

Personally, I wouldn't hold on to a gun that I thought was defective even if it worked. How are you going to sell it for a decent price after you've told the buyer about the problem.

_________________“Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a harder battle.” /Plato

I bought an LCR22 and was unhappy with the trigger weight. The gun functioned fine but they were not willing to get the pull weight below 12bs. They offered to exchange it for some other Ruger gun. I got a BH .357/9mm convertible.

I know what you mean about the trigger pull. Rim fire needs more strike to fire than does center fire therefore the hammer springs are stronger.And since the LCR is DA only, one is forced to load the hammer with the trigger.Not many DA rim fires out there with a decent trigger and since Ruger chose to make the LCR22 DA only, a person has no option.If they made it shrouded like the Smith 638 rather than covered, then it could be manually cocked and shot SA with a light trigger spring permitting the hammer spring to still be quiet strong.

My solution is a Taurus 941 with a bit of a lighter hammer spring installed and a much lighter trigger spring but I do wish the small frame revolver was a Ruger.

I'm starting to suspect that I have a .327 with the faulty cylinder. My serial number is 573-83xxx I bought 500 Starline .32 H&R Magnum cases (because .327 Federal Magnum brass and ammunition was unavailable here in Norway (still haven't seen it)) and have reloaded them 10 times now.

Of the original 500, I've 400 left. The rest is split in the sides. None has split at the casemouth.

This is the only revolver I have this problem with.

I'm thinking about have a gunsmith fit a .32 H&R Mag cylinder, since I'm only using that anyway.

I'm starting to suspect that I have a .327 with the faulty cylinder. My serial number is 573-83xxx I bought 500 Starline .32 H&R Magnum cases (because .327 Federal Magnum brass and ammunition was unavailable here in Norway (still haven't seen it)) and have reloaded them 10 times now.

Of the original 500, I've 400 left. The rest is split in the sides. None has split at the casemouth.

This is the only revolver I have this problem with.

I'm thinking about have a gunsmith fit a .32 H&R Mag cylinder, since I'm only using that anyway.

Regards from Norway

I had that happen with .32 S&W long in the SP 101 .327 with Remington ammo, Remington recall that box and said the brasswas scratched on the inside during manufacture of the cases.

The .327 Fed Mag is still alive -- I reload them continually for my GP-100, still using the initial 500 cases I bought from Starline. (They are currently "BackOrdered - Available: NEXT RUN WHEN SUFFICIENT BACKORDER ACHIEVED"). I may just order another 500, on the optimistic hope I live into my 70's or 80's...

The GP-100, with a mild load (3.5 grains Trail Boss) under a 100 grain Hornady JHP bullet, is tremendously accurate and very fun to shoot. Also economical. I wish I still had my SP-101 in .327 FED MAG, but the darn things now cost almost double their original price, if you can even find them on GUNS AMERICA or GUNBROKER.COM.

I have the SP101 in 327. I bought it thinking my wife would shoot it. I added the crimson trace laser grip for her. Well, she just never took to it so I'm thinking of selling it. I did really like its versatility, shooting several different rounds, but I don't go to the range very often these days. May post in the classifieds, but not sure what is a fair price considering market value and the additional CT laser grip. Any suggestions on a good, fair price? It's in as-new condition so I was thinking in the $500 range with the CT grip. Appreciate any feedback.